U.S. President Donald Trump’s renewed threat to impose higher tariffs on India over its continued import of Russian oil has drawn sharp criticism from policy experts and diplomats alike. The move, seen as both politically expedient and strategically inconsistent, overlooks a central reality: during Trump’s previous tenure, the United States itself had tacitly supported global oil purchases from Russia to ensure market stability.
Russia remains one of the largest oil producers globally, and unlike countries such as Iran and Venezuela, it has not been subjected to a comprehensive international embargo on energy exports. This nuance is not lost on U.S. officials. Former Ambassador to India Eric Garcetti openly acknowledged the strategic complexities surrounding Russian oil trade, highlighting that cutting Moscow off from global markets would disrupt global energy flows.
India, for its part, has remained transparent and consistent. Speaking at the Munich Security Conference in early 2024, External Affairs Minister Dr. S. Jaishankar categorically rejected Western criticism, underscoring the double standards of countries that quietly continued purchasing Russian crude—some of it rerouted via third countries—while publicly admonishing others.
India's Energy Policy: Lawful and Pragmatic
India has repeatedly made clear that its oil trade with Russia does not violate any international law. Russian crude is not currently under a multilateral sanctions regime, and India has affirmed it would comply with such restrictions if imposed. Until then, its policy is guided by national interest and energy security.
The numbers underscore this pragmatic approach. India currently sources crude oil from over 40 countries. Russia accounts for approximately 30–35% of imports, followed by Iraq at 15%. Other major suppliers include Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, the United States, and Kuwait, each contributing between 5–8%. The shift toward Russian oil was driven not by politics, but by economics: discounted pricing, favorable payment terms, and availability under the G7’s $60-per-barrel price cap.
Domestic Politics vs. Global Realities
Trump’s rhetoric may be tailored to appeal to domestic constituencies ahead of upcoming political milestones. However, analysts warn that such tactics undermine the credibility of U.S. strategic messaging—especially when aimed at democratic partners like India.
From New Delhi’s perspective, the message is unequivocal: India will not compromise its strategic autonomy. Its foreign policy is guided by its own security and economic imperatives, not by the political priorities of other capitals. As senior Indian officials have consistently stated, external pressure—regardless of origin—will not dictate India’s sovereign decisions.
A Delicate Balancing Act
Trump’s tariff threats, if followed through, risk straining bilateral ties at a time when India–U.S. cooperation spans a wide spectrum: defense, technology, climate action, and Indo-Pacific stability. Attempting to coerce India into abandoning its carefully calibrated energy policy may yield little in practical terms, while damaging long-term strategic trust.
India's position is rooted in a clear-eyed understanding of global energy dynamics. The shift to Russian crude was a decision born out of necessity, not defiance—and unless a unified global sanctions regime emerges, India is unlikely to deviate from that course.
In a multipolar world where national interests increasingly shape global alignments, India is asserting its voice with growing confidence. And it is doing so on its own terms.
.png)
The opinions posted here do not belong to 🔰www.indiansdaily.com. The author is solely responsible for the opinions.
As per the IT policy of the Central Government, insults against an individual, community, religion or country, defamatory and inflammatory remarks, obscene and vulgar language are punishable offenses. Legal action will be taken for such expressions of opinion.